TNG Characters in the JJ-Verse

Terminator is a pretty bad example to use since after the second one, it too makes very little sense. T3, T4, and SCC all tried to milk the brand even though it was essentially done after T2 and really didn't need continuation. Every producer who came along had to really twist things to keep it going, and the result was always less than stellar.

Aside from that, I liked the line in T3 where Arnold says that "Judgment Day is inevitable." Maybe terminators that look like Arnold, or John sending back Kyle shouldn't be inevitable, but the message was that the fate of humanity would always lead to that. It was inevitable that their hubris leads them to building a super computer that was capable of wiping them out. If it wasn't Dyson, then it would just be somebody else. If it wasn't in 1997, it would just get pushed back to later. It's almost like inventing electricity. It was likely inevitable as long as people didn't wipe themselves out first.

But interpersonal events? Yeah, it's silly when those stay the same. It's ridiculous to say that someone like Kyle Reese, who originally states that he was born after the war can be exactly the same person born before the war. That is when things become far too stretched.

Having TNG characters would certainly stretch it that much. The original cast showing up on the Enterprise isn't as bad as that, but the way everything lined up still strained probability.

Having seen the Terminator films and TV series, where those damn machines keep eventually being built even when the company behind them changes (Cyberdyne in T1 and 2, Cyber Systems in T3), when the origin of Skynet changes (a big mainframe, then a internet software program from the US Air Force, then a chess computer merging with something-or-other in the TV series) and the date of the nuclear apocalypse keeps changing but remains a constant event.... yeah, I can see the Enterprise crew uniting in a ton of different timelines.

Click to expand...

I don't deny they could come together early "in a ton of different timelines". The question is: Could they come together in the actual timeline that branched off from the prime universe, given the disruption cased by Nero? Remember, this would be the same likelihood that would occur in a traditional time travel story if the prime timeline itself had be effected in the same way. So we are not talking about an infinite number of timelines to choose from.

...
Having TNG characters would certainly stretch it that much. The original cast showing up on the Enterprise isn't as bad as that, but the way everything lined up still strained probability.

Click to expand...

Do you think TNG characters would stretch credibility purely because they are from TNG, or because you don't think their existence can be explained well enough in the earlier time period? Ignoring Spock Prime of course.

Probably both, but I was more referring to their time period (24th century in the JJverse). There are some that have been listed that could be around, such as Guinan, but most of the regular cast were born decades afterward, and it's hard to believe that with something as major as the destruction of Vulcan, that it wouldn't affect the lives of the next gen shows parents, grandparents, etc.

I don't deny they could come together early "in a ton of different timelines". The question is: Could they come together in the actual timeline that branched off from the prime universe, given the disruption cased by Nero? Remember, this would be the same likelihood that would occur in a traditional time travel story if the prime timeline itself had be effected in the same way. So we are not talking about an infinite number of timelines to choose from.

Click to expand...

In real life, if such things as time travel were possible? Probably not. But in Star Trek's world, yes. We've already had one similar example in Next Gen's "Yesterday's Enterprise", where an event altered 22 years in the past led to a present where everyone but Worf was where they "should" be on the USS Enterprise, despite the enourmous difference of a war with the Klingons (that the Federation was losing) raging on for most of that time. That the Enterprise would have been in the same place as it's prime-verse counterpart to witness the Enterprise-C arriving from the rift is incredibly iffy. The exact place it needed to be to put things right.

Yea, we've all seen stories where "Stepping on a butterfly" can change everything drastically, but, it's just as possible stepping on it will have no effect.

We'd already met the Vulcans when Vulcan was blown up, so, the fact Vulcan has been blown up doesn't necessarily need to change anything we're seeing with regards to people who exist and where. Now, of course, any Vulcans may have a drastically changed present, some may never be born, etc. But, someone from Earth, such as Captain Picard, would have to have his parents meeting be affected by Vulcan still being around, such as a mission they went on together in relation to the Vulcans, where they met or a Vulcan who was killed in the destruction of Vulcan saved one of their lives in the Prime Time line, etc.

So, the further removed you are from your history revolving around something that was changed the less likely that change is going to affect you.

Certainly the desctruction of Vulcan may change your timeline, but, it's just as likely not to have.

We've already had one similar example in Next Gen's "Yesterday's Enterprise", where an event altered 22 years in the past led to a present where everyone but Worf was where they "should" be on the USS Enterprise, despite the enourmous difference of a war with the Klingons (that the Federation was losing) raging on for most of that time.

Click to expand...

Actually, not only was Worf gone, but so was Troi, and Yar was there. That showed at least a modicum of thought about who should and shouldn't be there. With the new movie, the goal seemed to be just to shoehorn everybody in there, without any of this thought. Had maybe Chekov not been there, and maybe someone like Number One been there, then it would have been a little bit easier to swallow.

That the Enterprise would have been in the same place as it's prime-verse counterpart to witness the Enterprise-C arriving from the rift is incredibly iffy. The exact place it needed to be to put things right.

Click to expand...

A decent point, but how do you know it was the exact same place?

At any rate, the intro and outro of the episode are a little bit clunky in more ways than just this, but they needed a way to frame the episode around Guinan, and showing the Enterprise in our regular timeline was the dramatic way to do that. Not every character was necessary in this movie, nor did their gathering need to be so blatantly coincidental.

Now, of course, any Vulcans may have a drastically changed present, some may never be born, etc. But, someone from Earth, such as Captain Picard, would have to have his parents meeting be affected by Vulcan still being around, such as a mission they went on together in relation to the Vulcans, where they met or a Vulcan who was killed in the destruction of Vulcan saved one of their lives in the Prime Time line, etc.

Click to expand...

It doesn't need to be so direct. Upon everybody simply hearing about Vulcan being destroyed, they would have stopped what they were doing, changed their plans, and changed their thoughts about many things. That alone might not change Picard's grandpa meeting up with his grandma, but the chances of Picard's grandpa having the exact same sperm reach the exact same egg at just the right time is astronomically improbable. Add in his other grandparents, his parents, and the odds of all of them uniting, and the probability is about as close to zero as you could get.

Now, Star Trek has had its share of improbability when it comes to this. First Contact is definitely a good example. The Borg go back and change things, and the Enterprise goes back to minimize their damage. But the changes still happened. When the Enterprise returns to the future, it's highly unlikely that it would be the same future they remember. Usually that just happens to not impede the narrative or mindfuck the audience. But the next gen crews are all unnecessary. They don't need to be there this time around for any reason. It's not helping any narrative in any way.

Now, of course, any Vulcans may have a drastically changed present, some may never be born, etc. But, someone from Earth, such as Captain Picard, would have to have his parents meeting be affected by Vulcan still being around, such as a mission they went on together in relation to the Vulcans, where they met or a Vulcan who was killed in the destruction of Vulcan saved one of their lives in the Prime Time line, etc.

Click to expand...

It doesn't need to be so direct. Upon everybody simply hearing about Vulcan being destroyed, they would have stopped what they were doing, changed their plans, and changed their thoughts about many things. That alone might not change Picard's grandpa meeting up with his grandma, but the chances of Picard's grandpa having the exact same sperm reach the exact same egg at just the right time is astronomically improbable. Add in his other grandparents, his parents, and the odds of all of them uniting, and the probability is about as close to zero as you could get.

Now, Star Trek has had its share of improbability when it comes to this. First Contact is definitely a good example. The Borg go back and change things, and the Enterprise goes back to minimize their damage. But the changes still happened. When the Enterprise returns to the future, it's highly unlikely that it would be the same future they remember. Usually that just happens to not impede the narrative or mindfuck the audience. But the next gen crews are all unnecessary. They don't need to be there this time around for any reason. It's not helping any narrative in any way.

Click to expand...

First, let me say, I'm not in favor of shoehorning in TNG folks, so, I have no dog in that fight.

Why would simple Earth Plantation/Vineyard owners (Picards Parents) stop everything they were doing and change their plans because Vulcan was destroyed? It would have nothing to do with them, they weren't Starfleet, they have a Plantation/Vineyard on Earth. Did everyone in California stop everything they were doing and change all their plans and their whole life because of Hurricaine of Katrina devastating New Orleans? No. Sure some ran straight off to New Orleans to help out, but, most just went on about their business. The destruction of Vulcan would be nothing more than a passing thought, if that, for a Plantation/Vineyard owner

Actually, not only was Worf gone, but so was Troi, and Yar was there. That showed at least a modicum of thought about who should and shouldn't be there. With the new movie, the goal seemed to be just to shoehorn everybody in there, without any of this thought. Had maybe Chekov not been there, and maybe someone like Number One been there, then it would have been a little bit easier to swallow.

Click to expand...

Although IRL the known TOS crew united for the movie in 2258, in-universe the crews weren't "correct" for the time. The prime-universe Enterprise crew of 2254 included Number One, Doctor Boyce, Jose Tyler and Yeoman Colt. That's very different from the crew we saw in STXI, which began with Chief Engineer Olsen and Dr. Puri before the TOS regulars took over, and was still missing Yeoman Rand by the end of the movie. The full TOS crew (including Chekov) wasn't united until 2266.

Why would simple Earth Plantation/Vineyard owners (Picards Parents) stop everything they were doing and change their plans because Vulcan was destroyed? It would have nothing to do with them, they weren't Starfleet, they have a Plantation/Vineyard on Earth. Did everyone in California stop everything they were doing and change all their plans and their whole life because of Hurricaine of Katrina devastating New Orleans? No. Sure some ran straight off to New Orleans to help out, but, most just went on about their business. The destruction of Vulcan would be nothing more than a passing thought, if that, for a Plantation/Vineyard owner

Click to expand...

That sounds rather dispassionate. I wouldn't liken it to a natural disaster. It was a terrorist attack that involved the destruction of an entire Federation world. I think the closest modern American equivalent would be 9/11, but in 9/11 there was only a few thousand deaths rather than billions; a terrorist attack vs. genocide.

Now imagine the ways in which 9/11 affected your life. I could certainly say that my specific kids wouldn't have been born if not for 9/11, and I didn't have any direct ties to New York either. I didn't just shrug it off and say, "Well, back to my own little world." I didn't run out and help people either, but it changed the way I thought, and there were many experiences to learn from it, and many things to consider. It also affected government policies, diplomatic relations, the economy, culture, etc. There was a lot of fallout. Even if you kept to yourself most of the time, a lot of the people surrounding you may not have.

Since 9/11 was just a drop in the bucket compared to Vulcan being destroyed, imagine if the entire UK was destroyed. Do you not think that would have any impact on people across the globe? Do you think they'd still go about their business in the exact same way? It's highly doubtful.

Although IRL the known TOS crew united for the movie in 2258, in-universe the crews weren't "correct" for the time. The prime-universe Enterprise crew of 2254 included Number One, Doctor Boyce, Jose Tyler and Yeoman Colt. That's very different from the crew we saw in STXI, which began with Chief Engineer Olsen and Dr. Puri before the TOS regulars took over, and was still missing Yeoman Rand by the end of the movie. The full TOS crew (including Chekov) wasn't united until 2266.

Click to expand...

That reinforces the idea that this crew is some crew of fate. Despite other things being so different, what is it that makes it so that they all end up in the exact same places and positions? It's fate.

there wouldn't be any point in him saying anything if he thought his alternative "scientific" explanation had so low a probability that he had to resort to fate or mysticism etc.

Click to expand...

He doesn't.

UFO said:

apart from your redefinition of "very high" to mean "low"

Click to expand...

It's a question of scale. Compared to your impression of it, the number in question may in fact be "very high".

UFO said:

And of course the only way to avoid the relentless feeling that things are only happening because the writers need it to, is to suppose some form of destiny.

Click to expand...

This is self-fulfilling circular logic and of little value. It's basically an attempt to end run around the fact that the above destiny theory is not actually presented in the film.

UFO said:

your quote of Oric is his attempt to make parts of the film look less "ridiculous"

Click to expand...

Sure it is.

UFO said:

it appears I speak for the writers!

Click to expand...

Nice one.

UFO said:

We are talking about the likelihood of all the original crew getting together almost a decade before they did in the prime timeline (and in particular event like the chances of Spock Prime meeting Krik and Scotty on DV) despite significant disruption.

Click to expand...

This likelihood is potentially not as small as you seem to think it must be.

UFO said:

Thanks for quoting me out of context.

Click to expand...

Nobody quoted you out of context. You claimed a line was in the film, but it wasn't in the film. Same context.

Why would simple Earth Plantation/Vineyard owners (Picards Parents) stop everything they were doing and change their plans because Vulcan was destroyed? It would have nothing to do with them, they weren't Starfleet, they have a Plantation/Vineyard on Earth. Did everyone in California stop everything they were doing and change all their plans and their whole life because of Hurricaine of Katrina devastating New Orleans? No. Sure some ran straight off to New Orleans to help out, but, most just went on about their business. The destruction of Vulcan would be nothing more than a passing thought, if that, for a Plantation/Vineyard owner

Click to expand...

While the Picard vineyard and Picard family may not have been directly affected by the destruction of Vulcan, certainly an attack from a Romulan mining vessel on Earth, even in San Francisco thousands of miles from Chateau Picard, would have been a sufficient event to cause a number of butterfly effects to spring up.

What I want to know is -- what happens if NuKirk slingshots the NuEnterprise back to 1969 and beams over to the TOS Enterprise just before they slingshot back to the 23rd century?

Or what if NuChekov beams Captain Christopher out of his plane before the TOS Enterprise does? .. Or say NuEnterprise slingshots around the sun and arrives at April 5, 2063 and NuKirk beams to the E-E before they head back to the 24th century?

there wouldn't be any point in him saying anything if he thought his alternative "scientific" explanation had so low a probability that he had to resort to fate or mysticism etc.

Click to expand...

He doesn't.

Click to expand...

Orci appears to believe otherwise, thus his remarks.

UFO said:

apart from your redefinition of "very high" to mean "low"

Click to expand...

It's a question of scale. Compared to your impression of it, the number in question may in fact be "very high".

Click to expand...

There is no "scale" involved and any numbers don't alter the fact that he is saying straight-out that the "probability assigned to such an event [the crew coming together etc] is very high in the multiverse". There is no way to scale that back. There is no way to avoid the fact that he is relying on the sheer number of universes available to make a low probability event seem almost inevitable. And that might be true if he had a multiverse to choose from, but he doesn't.

This is self-fulfilling circular logic and of little value. It's basically an attempt to end run around the fact that the above destiny theory is not actually presented in the film.

Click to expand...

It’s a reasonable interpretation. Alternatively we could just go back to calling it extremely unlikely if you prefer, but that doesn't seem any better. As I said, it was Spock Prime who raised the spectre of "Destiny" and even Orci was taking about "fate" so how can I be wrong to do so?

Sure it is.

Click to expand...

Ok, less "fateful". Of course that is just another way of making it seem "more plusable", shall we say? Assuming you think fate is plausible, which doesn't appear to be the case.

This likelihood is potentially not as small as you seem to think it must be.

Click to expand...

Whatever gets you through the night.

Nobody quoted you out of context. You claimed a line was in the film, but it wasn't in the film. Same context.

Click to expand...

I happen to think the "context" softens the impression of my statement. But I'm just glad I didn't put any money on it!

But why would fate make sure Kirk and his TOS season 2+ crew united, and not the "proper" crew of Pike or even Kirk's "Where No Man..." crew? And why would fate allow Amanda and planet Vulcan to die?

Besides, we're working with incomplete information, comparing 2258 in one timeline with 2365-66 in another. By the time this movie trilogy is over, the crew may not be intact. They may have united early just for members to die or move on prior to 2265-66. McCoy may die and Dr. Dehner (Alice Eve, just speculating) may take his place.

Then again, after having read the recent (and utterly fantastic) Voyager novel The Eternal Tide, where...

Admiral Janeway's death became a fixed point in the multiverse. In every timeline except the pre-"Endgame" one, she died in 2380. It turns out it was basically an act of self-preservation by the multiverse itself!

...maybe the universe is ensuring it's own survival by uniting Kirk's crew at all costs. Maybe it's to stop the space amoeba in a few years? The multiverse summons it's antibodies!

But why would fate make sure Kirk and his TOS season 2+ crew united, and not the "proper" crew of Pike or even Kirk's "Where No Man..." crew? And why would fate allow Amanda and planet Vulcan to die?

Click to expand...

You're asking about fate like it's a reasonable thing. The simple answer is that those things were not fated to happen. The uniting of the cast of season 2 in all of their same positions in a different time despite the seeming improbability is fate.

When such great coincidences occur, that's when people start to question if there's something more to it. You can either assume that there's some sort of in-universe mumbo jumbo to explain it (like Orci's poor attempt), or you can just accept that it happened that way because the writers wanted it to happen that way without any concern about if it makes sense. Neither of those are very palatable options for me.

maybe the universe is ensuring it's own survival by uniting Kirk's crew at all costs.

Click to expand...

Again, that would be fate. I never really felt like Kirk or Picard or anyone on Star Trek were the only ones who could save the day in specific circumstances.

SPOCK: I would not remind you of that which you know so well. If I may be so bold, it was a mistake for you to accept promotion. Commanding a starship is your first best destiny. Anything else is a waste of material.

SPOCK: I would not remind you of that which you know so well. If I may be so bold, it was a mistake for you to accept promotion. Commanding a starship is your first best destiny. Anything else is a waste of material.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Yes. But BEST destiny implies other possibilities - so while it is a valid use of the word destiny, it isn't the same use as the one that implies predestination. Which is what we're really talking about here, I think.

SPOCK: I would not remind you of that which you know so well. If I may be so bold, it was a mistake for you to accept promotion. Commanding a starship is your first best destiny. Anything else is a waste of material.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Yes. But BEST destiny implies other possibilities - so while it is a valid use of the word destiny, it isn't the same use as the one that implies predestination. Which is what we're really talking about here, I think.

For all those decrying fate, there is actually a quantum mechanical basis for the “fate function” in this film that we have discussed previously. In a multiverse where, as Data once said “anything that can happen, does happen, in a parallel universe…” there is a probability (a number) associated with each possible configuration. Those events that are most probable are theorized to occur more often in more similar universes. Thus, the idea that Kirk and Spock and Bones come together is merely an indication that the probability assigned to such an event is very high in the multiverse. Some may mistake this for blind fate.

Click to expand...

It seemed as if it might fit in here somewhere, but feel free to disregard if it doesn't.